Fujifilm X20 Review

The enthusiast compact sector has undergone a distinct revival in recent years, with every major manufacturer now producing a model or two that offers full manual control and Raw recording, aimed as a second camera for enthusiasts who usually carry an SLR. In general these have split into two camps - small, slimline 'shirt pocket' cameras designed for portability, and larger models with more external controls, flash hot shoes, and large aperture zoom lenses. The X20 is Fujifilm's latest offering in the latter class.

At first glance, the X20 looks just like its predecessor (the X10), although it's now available in a very pretty silver-and-black finish, alongside the conventional all-black. But inside it offers a couple of very significant differences. The first is a brand-new sensor, a 2/3" type 'X-Trans CMOS' design that uses the same novel color filter array as Fujifilm's recent APS-C cameras. This sensor also has phase detect autofocus built right into it - not new to Fuji cameras, but a change from the X10. The second big change is an updated 'Advanced Optical Viewfinder' that includes a detailed information overlay, showing key exposure data and focus confirmation. This isn't the same as the hybrid viewfinder found in the company's X100/X100S and X-Pro1 models - there's no electronic viewfinder - but it's never been done before on a compact camera.

The X20 is available in silver/black and all-black bodies

Aside from this, the X20 retains most of the same features that made the X10 so appealing. It uses the same fast zoom lens, with a 28-112mm equivalent angle of view and F2.0-2.8 maximum aperture, which is operated by a mechanically-coupled zoom ring that also retracts the lens and turns the camera on and off. It has plenty of external controls, including an exposure compensation dial and two rear dials, and a hot shoe for external flash. One feature notable by its absence is a direct movie record button - the X20 is clearly designed for still photography first, and video second.

If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital
Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help
you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based
on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review
before coming to your own conclusions.

Images which can be viewed
at a larger size have a small magnifying glass icon in the bottom
right corner of the image, clicking on the image will display a
larger (typically VGA) image in a new window.

To navigate the review simply
use the next / previous page buttons, to jump to a particular section
either pick the section from the drop down or select it from the
navigation bar at the top.

DPReview calibrate their
monitors using Color Vision OptiCal at the (fairly well accepted)
PC normal gamma 2.2, this means that on our monitors we can make
out the difference between all of the (computer generated) grayscale
blocks below. We recommend to make the most of this review you should
be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally
A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2013 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

I have the X20 for 3 months. In the A and S modus, the camera produces pictures which are overexposed. Especially during daylight. I don't understand why. Do I do something wrong? Is there a bug in the software (v. 1.02)? I have sent an email to the Dutch Fuji helpdesk, but they don't even bother to give a response. Can anyone help me with this? Example, in the A-modus (with Iso on Auto and after I gave the camera a reset) I took 5 pictures. For every picture I choose a different aperture. The picture was taken of the same scene and all within one minute. The result in speed and Iso were: F Speed Iso2.2 1/1000 1002.5 1/1000 1002.8 1/1300 1003.2 1/1400 1003.6 1/1500 100

Only the last picture with F3.6 had the right exposure.Why does the camera choose a speed of 1/1000 when I pick F2.2, with an overexposed picture as a result. And why NOT (for example) 1/2000 in order to produce a well-exposed picture?The same (reversed) problem happens in the S-modus.

Just got an X20 after much research. Could have waited for X30 but decided that I may then just as well wait for X40, etc. and miss more pictures. I have to say the X20 is excellent (moving from a Nikon D40 + set of lenses plus iPhone 5s). What did I want: small and light to take with me when cycling (and all other times too), a proper high quality viewfinder, a proper zoom ring and decent optical zoom range plus simple exposure control. The X20 delivers in spades. I don't see any rivals with those features - well done Fuji for designing cameras for photographers who enjoy the tactile feel of real camera controls.

The trend runs increasingly stronger toward compacts that pack lots of power, and it's a trend that seems to be continuing full steam ahead. The X20 is one of the important players in the field and has been holding a respectable place for a year now. Competition keeps springing up, with more features in ever smaller bodies, so is the X30 just around the corner?

Alex More is right, we all run and hope and buy to find always a deception somewhere. I sometimes take a old Pentax , Nikkormat and veven a Minox, I shoot, develop and digitalise and : the result is sure there !

@madmaxmedia - thanks for your feedback. Agreed that the smudging is not due to the lack of AA filter. The real issue as you also point out is most likely the aggressive use of NR even at base ISO. I think the lack of AA filter emphasizes this problem even more. Glad to read that at least the raw files are better in this respect.

@inspireddan- I don't think the smudging is due to the lack of AA filter, it's due to increased noise reduction. The X20 RAW files are great. But the JPEG's are worse than the X10 in the opinion of many who have used both. It's too bad, I really like my X10 and would otherwise upgrade to the X20 (I mostly shoot JPEG).

Dear Fuji,Why would you remove the optical AA filter if there is "smudge [of] fine details (even at ISO 100)"? Not having a filter may be okay on a larger sensor which captures more light (such as in the X100), but on smaller sensor it may only emphasize this problem. I don't have an X20 but on my F45FD (same as F40FD), I also notice smudging of fine details at base ISO, especially around the edges of objects. If I apply slight blurring in post, the picture looks much better. I can't help but think that have that camera not had an AA filter, the smudging problem would have been even more noticeable.Thanks,-Dan

Oh, what a continuing disappointment...! Digital camera engineering deserves better.Mirrorless rangefinder cameras with manual focus should be a done deal by now. I suppose I'm as easily seduced by novelty features and shiny new digital gizmos as most, and to be fair to all the gadget-heads who are prepared to put up with costly digital gear that looks OK on the outside but still doesn't deliver then you have to admit that Fuji's corporate profit-taking is not as mean as the rest. I mean, it's nice to see Fuji is keeping some form of stabilising eye-level viewfinder. These are time-tested. They not only allow image composition in bright daylight but help steady a camera, something not possible using cut-rate contemporary mirroless, viewfinderless digital toy still and mobile/cell phone cameras at absurd arms-length fashion.

Look, as much as I'd really like a mirorless digital that doesn't come with a Leica price tag I'll continue to use a standard DSLR and wait until Fuji -or someone else uses better sensors, with proper size - or at the very least APS-H to produce a usable camera that can perform for photojournalsm at an artisan cost below the badge price of the Germans.Otherwise there's no point moving away from a so-called 'full frame' (35mm equivalent) sensor DSLR, unless your personal wealth or your work or hobby can justify a good camera like a Leica.I accept I'm being cynical to make a point against the plethora of gushing reviews for sub-standard compromise digital gear, but most of the mirrorless cameras are not much better than toys that deliver passable back-lit and email images. These cameras are not ideal for photojournalism.

Alex, I'm SO enjoying your comments. I was a film shooter (1960s-1980s, Nikkormat FTn). I've tried to be happy using a Leica D-Lux 5, but screen scrolling is so frustrating, as is the lack of a viewfinder. I'm a 70 yr old woman now and I want one more chance to 'meet' a camera that melds with me (manual, f-stops on the lens, external shutter speed knob, full-frame viewfinder. If I can't find this 'in digital' I just might buy an old Nikkormat !! Do you feel the Fuji X100S is a fairly good choice? It's on Alamy's list of acceptable cameras.

I am in my late 60's and recently bought a Fuji X-A1 and a X-E1 as lightweight more compact alternatives to my SLR gear, with a view to switching systems. I am finding the transition a bit of a chore. The X-A1 is great indoors and in overcast conditions but difficult to use in full sun owing to the lack of hood or VF; the solution would be buy a hood or a loupe. The X-E1 is easier for me to use with the EVF even with spectacles, but I find both slow to focus compared to my SLRs, so I tend to use the AF lock or focus manually. Quality is acceptable but I find RAW images require more adjustment (especially at higher ISO) than RAW images from my SLRs. I guess as with everything there are compromises and I will become more competent with longer use. I absolutely love the build quality and ergonomics, much better than most of the competition. If you get the chance, try out the X-E1 or X-E2 or even X-T1 before making a decision, especially if you can get one to try for a day or two.

Sure, we can have debates about rare-earth scarcity and high cost sensor manufacturer profitability and difficulties finding cheap labour in fringe junge factories to make cheap cameras and optics, as well as fitting it all in a look-alike traditional film camera platform. But aren't image and print quality and the ability to crop more important? As is the camera's purpose as a tool to serve a photographer's eye, the picture you perceive in your mind the instant you decide to trip a shutter and use light to create an image with minimal patchwork PS 'processing'...?A camera is an instrument. It should measure against an ideal. All else follows, including economics. But, in three simple words this camera has:

Everyone's 'ideal' is different. In your comments you are coming from a perspective of a professional that is meeting technical requirements from news agencies, etc.

I don't see anywhere in any reviews or Fuji documentation that this camera is intended for that purpose. If anything, it's an expensive yet high quality point and shoot for people (probably hobbyists) who appreciate good color reproduction in a small, light body. Maybe it's great for someone who doesn't want to carry their DLSR around all the time, and also doesn't have $2,500 for a full frame compact with no viewfinder.

It is really a great camera and I use it (more and more) besides or instead my Nikon 300s. One really serious flaw is the original battery (1000 mA) - it starts to collapse after 20 photos (is new!). The newly bought second one manages 100 pics (with less than 10 flash photos) but that is still far below useful number. Bought now aftermarket one (1400 mA) and hope it will solve my problem. My advice is to have full backup battery ready anytime!

This kind of background blur, even at 112mm, is never going to isolate a subject against the background. The background is still distracting.Your picture is misleading, btw, because the background is very far away here.Put this guy against a background that is 10m away, and you'll see (almost) as much detail there as in the subject's face.Anybody looking for a decent background blur should buy a camera with a 1 inch or bigger sensor.

This is a very detailed review, and plenty informative if you're looking to buy this camera. I actually got the camera based on this review and the opinions in the forum. What better place to go to for camera-related stuff than DPreview?

Alamy's a good place to begin. Most on-line reviews are subjective. Agences like Alamy must maintain image quality standards to keep credibility with publshers who buy images and complete pro phojournalism stories. Cameras they approve are a good starting point.

I disagree with the non pro use comment - I work for a large newspaper in Europe - I use this as a back up to my NikonD800 and Mamiya RZ67 when street photo style is needed for true look . Liecas are not so expensive as you think - try hiring one. That said I would only replace the X20 with either Sony R1, Sigma DP2 Merrell .

I haven't owned a camera in 20 years; almost bought a compact point-and-shoot on sale, but started looking at larger compacts (Canon G16, Fuji x20, some of the smallest 4/3). Can't imagine not having a viewfinder, but the G16's and apparently this one's aren't very good, it seems. Any recommendations for something I can both use automatically and set manually if I get the urge to really learn?